Thursday, June 12, 2008

David Davis resigns…

…and deflects all primary media attention away from the Irish referendum and rather more important matters relating to the EU.

It is, apparently, in protest at the Government’s plans to detain potentially innocent people for up to 42 days. Cranmer also opposes this, but the House of Commons voted on the matter, and the Conservative Party lost. In a representative democracy, that is how things go. You win some, and you lose some.

But Cranmer is truly baffled.

While His Grace has a certain penchant for martyrs and martyrdom, and rejoices with any politician who makes a moral stand based on conviction, it is not entirely clear what Mr Davis will achieve by this. He is highly likely to be re-elected, and so there will neither loss nor gain on the Opposition benches. He is unlikely to be re-appointed as Shadow Home Secretary, so he has sacrificed his position in the Shadow Cabinet in order to protest against Labour's authoritarian legislation which the Conservatives are, in any case, pledged to repeal if they win the next General Election. Certainly, the issue will be kept to the media fore a little more, but nothing can change until the Prime Minister goes to the country.

In his statement, David Davis invoked Magna Carta and protested at the erosion of the ancient rights and liberties of the British people. And he questioned the legality of the vote in the House to curtail those liberties.

Cranmer does not mean to be dense, but if 42-day detention without charge is worth resigning over, why was not 28? And, more importantly, why was the lack of a referendum on the Lisbon Treaty a fortiori not worth taking a principled stand and resigning over?

Are there not rather more ancient rights and liberties being eroded through ‘ever closer union?

22 Comments:

Nothos said...

Your Grace,I thought you of all people would have supported the move, if only to get the public discussing this. A member of the shadow cabinet resigning will be slapped across the news much more prominently than the results of a vote in the commons, regardless of how important.

As for Ireland, it seems a bit naive to assume that the mainstream British media would give it more than a cursory going over at the best of times. Look at the Lisbon result in the Lords, which was barely mentioned. Why would they discuss the issue when it's occurring in a foreign country when they're not even willing to discuss it occurring in ours?

It is just possible, if not highly likely, that the Irish referendum result (which His Grace believes will be 'No') would have been splashed across quite a few newspapers tomorrow.

It is not that Ireland was ever significant in the UK, but a 'No' in the only EU country to hold a referendum on the revamped Constitution would manifestly have been significant and have made headlines.

A lot of people have been saying, "Why didn't he do this before?" Well, perhaps he has been feeling more and more boxed in till at last he had to do something, and thank heavens he did!I hope that one inevitable result will be that the whole EU Elephant will eventually get some attention. So much of what DD is protesting about is EU lifeblood.

Abolishing habus corpus was not in nulabours 2005 manifesto (contract with the electorate) thus it is a matter of principle...your grace would not you resign from such a rotten institution? someone has to draw attention to the sleep walk to neopleonic (guilty till proved innocent as judged by the agents of the state) EU code,

What exactly are the Conservatives for? Is there any distinctive thing for which they stand – and for which they are prepared, if need be, to go down with all guns blazing? It's been a very long time since they gave any such impression. Which is why it is such a relief to find one, at any rate, of their number for whom principle clearly trumps personal advantage.

Maybe DD should have taken the same stance at 28 days. But that's water under the bridge – perhaps there was still hope, at that stage, that a point of equilibrium might be reached between the threat to national security and encroachments upon civil liberty. By now we surely know better: 42 days is merely a temporary stage in a never-ending process of dismantling our hard-won freedoms.

At some point, if one believes in those freedoms at all, one must say "thus far, and no further". There may not be any invincible logic to when one says it, but the point must be reached, or else the principle surrendered for ever. It must be neither so early as to appear to be straining at gnats, nor so late as to have already swallowed the camel. DD clearly believes that moment is now; it ill behoves those of us who believe in liberty to criticise his exact choice either of timing or of the casus belli.

If I was in that situation and wanted to shout about the question of freedom and the substitution of european law for our ancient laws and customs ( and get party support, well initially at least, from a party that did not want to talk about it ) I think to resign and seek re-election a pretty clever ploy.I don't think the 42 day issue will stay at the forefront for long.

PS has Your Grace noticed this ?

"Belief in God is much lower among academics than among the general population because scholars have higher IQs, a controversial academic claimed this week."

your grace despite the astonishment and discomfort , i think every person has their price and for david davis yesterdays terroism vote was it .

i think the media cannot savage his prinicpals or personal belief , he may have not batted an eyelid at 28 days , the climate back then was different , but he must have just sat dwon looked at parliment , and thought this isnt right , there are no mandates for this , no proof , no unianimity of support .

things are crystalising in the publics mind that parliment has ben rigged to cheat them out of there say on matters that require their say .

i want mr cameron to be the next prime minister hopefully heading a party with the conviction of david davies stance , the actual by election will in an odd way give people there say , despite being a large instrument to crack a labour nut

Your Grace.You say that " ...Labour's authoritarian legislation which the Conservatives are, in any case, pledged to repeal if they win the next General Election. "Forgive me, but my understanding is that they are committed to " looking at it closely... " only.Perhaps Mr Davis' bold stand will compel them to do more.

Polls sugest that over 60% of the public support 42 days but such is the unpopularity of this wretched Government that a by-election fought on this very issue is likely to humiliate them.

As we move into the world of Franz Kafka - propelled by lazy commentators, venal politicians, and an apparatchik class of Anti-Democrats, David Davis may appear curiously out of tune - ride but he simply wants no part of the conveyor-belt ride to 1984.

That is his choice - he is an MP elected by constituents. It seem perfectly reasonable to return to those who elected him and discuss matters...isn't that the supposed basis of legitimacy in this polity rather than adherence to some London party apparatus or media/broadcast monolith ?

I really do not see how a by-election writ which must take place in the autumn with the summer vacations ahead could affect all news items in-between, and the fact that Davis will not need to parade views he does not believe at the Tory Conference but can address the fringe; is forgotten in this obsessional fetishism with respect to Front Bench Politics.

1. He is expected to win his safe seat, even as a independant candidate - thus through his high profile resignation he has not lost any political power but gain credibility for what is a courageous stance amongst gutless men; for once I stand by the twitterati to say this will surely increase his electorate mandate in the forthcoming by-election.

2. Many political commentators believe that the entire 42days issue was a twofold strategy; it deflected attention away from the crucial House of Lords vote and it made Gordon Brown appear like he could carry some political clout - important to a man who has been more or less had his premiership terminalised months in to starting. Davis' actions have more or less neutered the press' coverage of "Brown's win". Long term his campaign in this by-election will bring the question of civil liberties to the fore; amongst which the question of supranational entities dictating to sovereign nations how to do business will have to be mentioned.

3. As the shadow home secretary he has a mandatory duty to support the parties policy and stance (which as I've commented here before, the Tory's have a "dont rock the boat" approach to creeping authoritarianism); now as a senior MP on an independant ticket he will be able to vocalise his concerns without the need for subtlety, political double-speak or outright lies, and he will be able to promote these issues to the fore without restriction - it wouldn't surprise me if Cameron wouldn't be put under immense pressure to give Davis his old job back or a similar one.

About His Grace:

Archbishop Cranmer takes as his inspiration the words of Sir Humphrey Appleby: ‘It’s interesting,’ he observes, ‘that nowadays politicians want to talk about moral issues, and bishops want to talk politics.’ It is the fusion of the two in public life, and the necessity for a wider understanding of their complex symbiosis, which leads His Grace to write on these very sensitive issues.

Cranmer's Law:

"It hath been found by experience that no matter how decent, intelligent or thoughtful the reasoning of a conservative may be, as an argument with a liberal is advanced, the probability of being accused of ‘bigotry’, ‘hatred’ or ‘intolerance’ approaches 1 (100%).”

Follow His Grace on

The cost of His Grace's conviction:

His Grace's bottom line:

Freedom of speech must be tolerated, and everyone living in the United Kingdom must accept that they may be insulted about their own beliefs, or indeed be offended, and that is something which they must simply endure, not least because some suffer fates far worse. Comments on articles are therefore unmoderated, but do not necessarily reflect the views of Cranmer. Comments that are off-topic, gratuitously offensive, libelous, or otherwise irritating, may be summarily deleted. However, the fact that particular comments remain on any thread does not constitute their endorsement by Cranmer; it may simply be that he considers them to be intelligent and erudite contributions to religio-political discourse...or not.

The Anglican Communion has no peculiar thought, practice, creed or confession of its own. It has only the Catholic Faith of the ancient Catholic Church, as preserved in the Catholic Creeds and maintained in the Catholic and Apostolic constitution of Christ's Church from the beginning.Dr Geoffrey Fisher, Archbishop of Canterbury, 1945-1961

British Conservatism's greatest:

The epithet of 'great' can be applied only to those who were defining leaders who successfully articulated and embodied the Conservatism of their age. They combined in their personal styles, priorities and policies, as Edmund Burke would say, 'a disposition to preserve' with an 'ability to improve'.

I am in politics because of the conflict between good and evil, and I believe that in the end good will triumph.Margaret Thatcher, Baroness Thatcher LG, OM, PC, FRS.(Prime Minister 1979-1990)

We have not overthrown the divine right of kings to fall down for the divine right of experts.Harold Macmillan, 1st Earl of Stockton, OM, PC.(Prime Minister 1957-1963)

Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy, its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery.Sir Winston Churchill, KG, OM, CH, TD, FRS, PC (Can).(Prime Minister 1940-1945, 1951-1955)

I am not struck so much by the diversity of testimony as by the many-sidedness of truth.Stanley Baldwin, 1st Earl Baldwin of Bewdley, KG, PC.(Prime Minister 1923-1924, 1924-1929, 1935-1937)

If you believe the doctors, nothing is wholesome; if you believe the theologians, nothing is innocent; if you believe the military, nothing is safe.Robert Cecil, 3rd Marquess of Salisbury, KG, GCVO, PC.(Prime Minister 1885-1886, 1886-1892, 1895-1902)

I am a Conservative to preserve all that is good in our constitution, a Radical to remove all that is bad. I seek to preserve property and to respect order, and I equally decry the appeal to the passions of the many or the prejudices of the few.Benjamin Disraeli KG, PC, FRS, Earl of Beaconsfield.(Prime Minister 1868, 1874-1880)

Public opinion is a compound of folly, weakness, prejudice, wrong feeling, right feeling, obstinacy, and newspaper paragraphs.Sir Robert Peel, Bt.(Prime Minister 1834-1835, 1841-1846)

I consider the right of election as a public trust, granted not for the benefit of the individual, but for the public good.Robert Jenkinson, 2nd Earl of Liverpool.(Prime Minister 1812-1827)

Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom. It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves.The Rt Hon. William Pitt, the Younger.(Prime Minister 1783-1801, 1804-1806)